People v. Howell’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently October 2020
11 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A statute may be challenged for vagueness on three grounds: (1) it does not provide fair notice of the conduct proscribed; (2) it confers on the trier of fact unstructured and unlimited discretion to determine whether an offense has been committed; (3) its coverage is overbroad and impinges on First Amendment freedoms. Id., 260 Mich.App. at 218 , 679 N.W.2d 77 , citing People v. Howell, 396 Mich. 16, 20 , 238 N.W.2d 148 (1976), and Grayned v. Rockford, 408 U.S. 104 , 108-109, 92 S.Ct. 2294 , 33 L.Ed.2d 222 (1972)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Nichols“[V]agueness challenges to statutes which do not involve First Amendment freedoms must be examined in the light of the facts of the case at hand.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Nichols
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.